The Definition Of Irresponsible Leadership? Obama’s Keystone Pipeline Call

keystone-pipelineI am trying to find another example of a U.S. President taking action that harms the nation and its citizens while admitting that it will have no measurable beneficial effects whatsoever.

I can’t find any. I’d like to know about one, and see how it worked out.

When the Washington Post’s editorial staff essentially calls a Democratic President’s conduct an embarrassment. it really must have been embarrassing…and it was. Obama’s sole explanation for his decision, which he has, as is his style, dithered over for years, was this:

“Ultimately if we’re going to prevent large parts of the Earth from becoming inhospitable or uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we’re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them.”

But killing the pipeline will keep no fossil fuels in the ground. So the reason really is this:

“America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious actions to fight climate change and, frankly, approving this project would have undercut that global leadership.”

Ah. So America will show it is serious about climate change by killing a project that all agree will have no tangible, long-term, short-term, measurable effects on climate change at all. This is Obama logic, as we have seen many times: good intentions is enough; results don’t matter. If his decision won’t help reduce the risk of parts of the Earth  becoming “inhospitable or uninhabitable in our lifetimes”—a risk that is also measurable and speculative at best—then the purpose of it isn’t to prove leadership. True, it proves atrocious leadership, but Obama is cynical, not stupid. The decision is political. Its only tangible benefit is to the Democratic Party, which feels the need to make the welfare of the U.S. and its citizens subordinate to the fanaticism of the environmentalist movement.

Said Canadian politician Brent Rathgeber,

“Had the decision been based solely on the project’s economic, energy security and environmental merits, I suspect the outcome would have been different. Keystone would have created 9,000 construction jobs in the U.S. Out of all the countries from which the U.S. imports oil (Mexico, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Venezuela) Canada is the only one with any greenhouse gas regulations.”

Oh, there are disputes about the jobs; one estimate pegs the number of full-time jobs over the span of the construction as 50, which isn’t much. It is something, though. Cancelling the pipeline accomplishes nothing. Barack Obama cannot prove his leadership, because he has already proven that he cannot lead in countless ways, for seven long and destructive years.

The liberal Washington Post, which has never formally endorsed a Republican candidate for President..never!… called the decision “killing a pipeline in order to satisfy emotional needs, ” and wrote of Obama’s demonstration of leadership in this instance:

President Obama rejected the Keystone XL oil pipeline on Friday, ending an unseemly political dispute marked by activist hysteria, GOP hyperbole, presidential weakness and a general incapability of various sides to see the policy question for what it was: a mundane infrastructure approval that didn’t pose a high threat to the environment but also didn’t promise much economic development. The politicization of this regulatory decision, and the consequent warping of the issue to the point that it was described in existential terms, was a national embarrassment, reflecting poorly on the United States’ capability to treat parties equitably under law and regulation.

Approved or not, the Keystone Pipeline was not a big deal. The deluded and incompetent leadership of the President, however, is a very big deal.

11 thoughts on “The Definition Of Irresponsible Leadership? Obama’s Keystone Pipeline Call

  1. Well, at least Obama will leave office Jan. 20, 2017. The Keystone Pipeline may not be a big deal as far as job creation or contributing much to energy independence. Perhaps he should consider the effect on the environment on flying Air Force One on all those trips to Hawaii.

  2. Wayne looks forward to the end of the Obama Administration in January 2017. I just hope we last that long. All of Obama’s decision-making — including executive orders emanating from the recommendations of faceless bureaucratic ideologues at various agencies — prove his lack of leadership. The Keystone Pipeline notwithstanding, the entire Middle East is on fire, while Obama negotiates with Iran and bows down to Putin. Much can happen in 14 months. Hold onto your hats!

  3. “Ultimately if we’re going to prevent large parts of the Earth from becoming inhospitable or uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we’re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them.”

    But killing the pipeline will keep no fossil fuels in the ground. So the reason really is this:

    “America is now a global leader when it comes to taking serious actions to fight climate change and, frankly, approving this project would have undercut that global leadership.”

    And from what I’ve perused, the objections raised by the Obama administration *formally* to all the agency reports has been ENTIRELY based on the pipeline’s possible route through a sensitive Ogallala Aquifer recharge zone…

    So not only is the primary argument against it that has been communicated to the American public not EVEN what the actual argument against it is, the actual argument against it had been alleviated time and again by proposed alternate pipeline routes AROUND the recharge zone.

    No, this has been an entire situation of the Child-King Obama, once he’s made his decision, to come up with a new excuse every time a solution has been proposed to mitigate his prior excuse. It is very much like arguing with a 3 year old.

  4. “Ultimately if we’re going to prevent large parts of the Earth from becoming inhospitable or uninhabitable in our lifetimes, we’re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them.”

    Or we could simply nuke uninhabited parts of the world ISIS and Gaza and create climate paradise aka nuclear winter.

    • Liable to happen anyway. Putin now won’t believe a strong President (one who is marginally competent or aggressive and incompetent) will stand up to him.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.